Creationism & liberal thought

[Sceptisk]

(Skrev detta på ett annat forum där det diskuterades kreationism.)

First I think that its nessecary to consider the great difference between the theistic and the "enlightenment" way of thought. After the so called enlightenment in Europe, portions of society got to adapt a materialistic view of the world and the astonishing belief that everything could be fully explained by the use of every mans ability for rational thought. Instead of seeing the world as designed by a creator and therefore inherently a mystery, the enlightenment movement went to try and establish a theory that could explain everything and do away with any "mystical" explanations whatsoever. This enlightenment movement consisting of highly reactionary revolutionaries that had a strong hate for authority and the church. They would eventually come to split up into socialists and liberals, both holding on to a materialistic ideology wich was the "metaphysical" fundament of the ideological takeover to dismantle any sort of authority. And ofcource also any sort of mystery. So the fact that we are ignorant, would become considered almost an abomination. It doesnt look good to ask too many questions in these progressive schools for example, its a sign of weakness. That it is our fundamental humility before creation as ignorant creatures is an idea none of these progressives would stand to think about. The theory of evolution was adopted by this sort of mindset as a way of trying to do away with all unwanted mysteries and establish a total, comprehensible and coherent outlook on the world. Therefore the language used by evolutionists reflects this attitude. It is actually a centuries old tradition of "progressive" rebellion against conservative values.

For liberals and socialists, the struggle might seem trivial. Mostly because they usually dont understand their own history. But for a conservative, the deal is not so much about a scientific theory, but about an entire mindset that is danerously persuasive for those who not yet have come to the faith. When you have faith, you dont look at a theory to be something that can really explain anything. You see it as a thought experiment or observation that requires deeper reflection. But the children of the enlightenment has never dared to move beyond that. Instead they want to see the theory itself as the truth, because they work from the tradition that holds that everything can be fully explained. They think they have found their truth, so why move any further? Indeed they think it is impossible to move any further. Why? Because liberal/enlightenment thought is inherently one dimensional and extremely cynical.

The rational thought cannot ponder lifes mysteries as they matter for a feeling person. It works as a calculator and is an expert at solving equations. And this view is what evolutionists has adopted. Life is an equation and it is now currently under being "solved" in various labs around the world. In its extremes, this current of thought found its culmination during WW2 in experimentation on humans in Germany and Japan.

The counterargument, wether life really could or should be seen this way is never seriously considered. It is taken for granted that life works like a computer program and the implications of this view is never fully meditated upon. Ethics, wich would immediately fall away, is simply being reinvented as a "model" wich one can have if one happends to be a "humanist". The revolutionary would seldomly agree that he would be immoral or lack a sound morality, he would in fact be greatly offended. Because he is after all the champion of justice! But even so, he would at another time argue that morality is relative to any other morality! The only solution to this "rationality" is reliance on ideologies and isms. And all the while creationists are being dejected as "irrational", superstitious and dogmatic. The real views of creationists remains silent and instead they retort by pointing to the Bible. Why is this? Because liberals are actually quite a difficult group of people. You dont want to throw pearls before swine. The truth is that any religious person knows that his views wich he considers very precious, would be bandwagoned by a liberal cynic who doesnt care one iota of his own views. Because for the liberal/socialist they are simply theories and calculations and doesnt hold affectional value. They disqualify imagination or poetry as a valid form of thought.

As a further point of philosophical reflection, Id like to add that creationists have a completely different way of looking at the matter. They dont limit their scope to a theory of one dimension, but are open to a deeper understanding. That life may not actually be as the theory says. Not an equation, but something more. That veery theory is inherently a limitation that may actually work against something more valuable than having everything fully exposed in front of a large audience. That there may be a force that is bigger than our minds that lived before us and lives outside of this world and designs things according to its purpose. A force that we need to be careful in how we act and think towards. We have to be humble before it. Does a creationist limit this scope to how a particular plant or insect looks? Certainly not. A creator can design in every concievable way, not just how things appear for us. A creator can design events for example. Who will meet who, and things like what will happend next and so on.

The "enlighetenment" thinkers has never considered this option because they have an ideological target for their studies. To do justice upon the unfair authority. And the idea of being humble before something strikes him as threatening or even ludicrous and when being told about it will only provoke him to laugh. These people want to destroy mystery and undermine anyone or anything that is representing this mystery; ethics, religion, believers, the church and authority.

Liberals has picked out a particular part of reality and hope to create an impenetrable ideological minefield around it. Using this piece of reality as evidence against a creator. To my mind it is like trying to isolate the code of a html webpage as evidence against the existance of Bill Gates. But this is the paradox of those in the enlightenment movement; liberals and socialists. Their inability to bow down to authority turns them into fools for all encompassing theories that originates within the allready given structure. Another example would be that they are trying to explain the entire society from one single theory that begins from their own personal view or belief of society. They will begin from the inside and work themselves outwards in all directions. They love cognitive theories and theories about DNA and molecules and atoms because they think that if they can probe and find the smalles element of their enviroment, they will be able to explain the entire enviroment using that little piece of information. In the same vein, if they find a person in society who happends to be unhappy or poor, they will use this shred of information to entirely condemn the authority.

The theist is a very different creature compared to the liberal or socialist. He does not strive to explain everything from its smallest component. He does it completely the other way around. He begins with faith that there is something greater and unexplained and unexplainable and by being humble to this great mystery and aligning himself to it, everything else will become clear as well. Because he realizes that he is part of something greater and doesnt have to figure it all out by himself using his rational mind. This allows him a certain freedom of thought and imagination and deepening of the relationship towards this great mystery of wich he is a part. He cannot find a shred of reason to be violent against this place because he cannot see that its a simple thing, a calculation. It isnt his place to explain to the world what it is, rather his position is that he has to be patient and curious and humble and hope that the world and the mystery may reveal itself to him, in its good time. Because what is, after all, the hurry?

[Algotezza]

Du you think you can fully explain the ideas and meaning of enlightenment? Or is there a remaining "mystical" part of it that rationality fails to explain?

Tror du att du helt kan förklara upplysningens idéer? Eller återstår en oförklarlig "mystisk" del?

The existence of a creator is not the problem, but  those people on earth claiming they are his representatives, building their power over ordinary people's mind and earthly matters on their own spiritual pride, scratching each other's back. In other words: God is not the problem but the church when acting the way here desrcibed, is. The church was accordingly the enemy of the enlightenment, not God/ the Creator in the first place.

Guds existesn är inte problemet men människor på jorden som menar sig vara Guds representanter och bygger sin makt över människors tänkande och jordiska ägodelar på sitt eget andliga högmod, kliande varandra på ryggen. M.a.o.: Gud är inte problemet men en kykra som agerar på nyssnämnda sätt. Upplysningens fiende var därför kyrkan, inte primärt Gud.

Is a "mystical" explanation an explanation at all? Is it an explanation to assert that the ways of God are unexplicable?

Är en "mystisk" förklaring alls en förklaring? Är det en förklaring att hävda att Guds vägar är oförklarliga/outrannsakliga?

Best wishes,

Algotezza